It is not a complete chess program and requires some UCI-compatible GUI (e.g. XBoard with PolyGlot, eboard, Arena, Sigma Chess, Shredder, Chess Partner or Fritz) in order to be used comfortably. Read the documentation for your GUI of choice for information about how to use Stockfish with it.

Current chess engines (most of them anyways, and stockfish for sure) use "bitboards" which is a 64bit type. 64bit is native in current CPUs. By using bitboards, they gain speed. This will not be as fast in 32bit CPU.

Speed is a big issue. Last time I checked stockfish was doing ~2million nodes per second (nps). On amiga (I think I was playing with an emulated A1200) a much simpler board representation (not bitboards) was giving me 1000 nps.

Current chess engines (most of them anyways, and stockfish for sure) use "bitboards" which is a 64bit type. 64bit is native in current CPUs. By using bitboards, they gain speed. This will not be as fast in 32bit CPU.

Speed is a big issue. Last time I checked stockfish was doing ~2million nodes per second (nps). On amiga (I think I was playing with an emulated A1200) a much simpler board representation (not bitboards) was giving me 1000 nps.

Pay attention that the total number of nodes the program has to check is exactly the same 1280563. Due to differences in speed the desktop needs 0.792 seconds while the netbook needs 5.933 seconds. The amiga A1200 (if we assume a similar quality compiler...which does not exist) would need something like 1200 seconds, to search the same

Pay attention that the total number of nodes the program has to check is exactly the same 1280563. Due to differences in speed the desktop needs 0.792 seconds while the netbook needs 5.933 seconds. The amiga A1200 (if we assume a similar quality compiler...which does not exist) would need something like 1200 seconds, to search the same

If that is true, then this code is a disgrace. It may be the most intelligent chess engine in the world, but it should'nt take any more than a few seconds to make its decision on a 68000.

nothing related to speed, stockfish in a pentium 100 mhz at 2 sec per move can play at 3000 elo it will destroy any human on earth even magnus carlsen

chessmaster 2100 in assembler is a weak and outdated obsolete chess engine, you can't compare with stockfish which is modern and is a masterpiece in programing

Sure thing, that is why IBM used P100 to beat Kasparov, right??

All chess masters are using chess engine now, mostly with ChessBase of Fritz front end (or some even FreeChess Database), but when they review position, one of them I remember told he uses 2 quad code processor server with 16 GB of memory (this was about 10 years ago, or bit more when I used to play lots of chess) just while exploring opening positions, and they give chess engine hours to crack position while looking for a novelty that will give them small advantage over opponent.

I doubt that even if ever moved to Amiga, limitation of hardware would limit engine to bellow 1800 chess rating. (still above your average player)

I think it's easy to underestimate just how difficult of a search problem Chess is. The state-space absolutely explodes in size when you start going deeper into the search tree, and if you want your Chess AI to do a really exhaustive search then you'll need many gigabytes of RAM.

Ah, yes RAM. Another limiting factor on the amiga would be ram.
All these modern chess engines would be seriously crippled if you run them without transposition tables space. I think the default stockfish benchmark (if you run 'stockfish bench') is using 128MB for the transposition table alone.

I think it's easy to underestimate just how difficult of a search problem Chess is. The state-space absolutely explodes in size when you start going deeper into the search tree, and if you want your Chess AI to do a really exhaustive search then you'll need many gigabytes of RAM.

Gigabytes? We're talking about chess here, not designing the next NASA space shuttle.

It's a task of deciding should I move my pawn here, or should I move my king there. A high powered CPU and lots of memory is simply not required and any software that does require these things is a piece of shit.

Yes that's what it comes down to in the end, but in order to arrive at that decision you will need to plan ahead, and in the context of a Chess AI that means considering all possible moves many steps ahead.

At any point in the game there could be several dozens of possible moves, and for each of those you have another dozen possible moves, and so on, quickly factoring into huge amounts of possible game-states which have to be considered.

Even with a smart heuristic where you only search through a fraction of the state-space, you are still looking at billions of states that have to be evaluated if you want your AI to play really well.